You didn't answer the questions in my first letter and now you say we have different views so further correspondence (with facts!) won't bring us together. So what this means is we do have the facts and since you can't prove we're wrong and you're loyal to industry, forget consumer safety, let the people continue to get sick and many die. So you're sacrificing the lives of the people because you know you cannot answer our questions, otherwise you would.

Many years ago my husband made a profound statement I never forgot, and it made me a better researcher. He said, "If you ever want the truth of a matter, you must be willing to accept the facts, no matter what the facts say." Your problem is you won't accept the facts. A simple example! Your web site is full of propaganda.

It says: "The evidence reviewed indicated that the body itself produces 0.3 to 0.6 g
methanol/day and that up to 1 g/day may be consumed in food, particularly fruit and vegetables. The methanol released from aspartame would be a maximum of 0.24
g/day (though survey data suggest it is actually much lower than this). Experiments have shown that exposure to aspartame, even at doses well above the maximum that could be expected from food and drink, does not lead to a build-up of formate in the blood. Furthermore, there are no reports of illness associated with long-term occupational exposure to methanol vapour at levels below the permitted maximum concentration of 200 parts per million (although adverse effects have been reported at higher levels). Over an eight-hour working day, this exposure would give a daily dose of approximately 1.9 g – well in excess of that which could occur from aspartame."

Uncertainties remain because there have been few studies of long-term repeated exposure to methanol, either in animals or in humans. However, from the evidence available, the COT concluded that amounts of methanol consumed through food, including from aspartame, would not result in build up of formate and so are unlikely to cause harmful health effects. The full COT statement can be found at: http://cot.food.gov.uk/pdfs/cotstatementmethanol201102.pdf

____________end

Neurosurgeon Russell Blaylock, M.D. in Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills explains that for every molecule of aspartame metabolized, a molecule of methanol was released into the blood stream. An EPA assessment of methanol states that methanol "is considered a cumulative poison due to the low rate of excretion once it is absorbed" Secondly, one liter of most aspartame sweetened soft drinks contains about 55 mg methanol. Methanol concentrations in aspartame sweetened beverages increase with heating and during prolonged storage. The amount of methanol ingested by heavy consumers of aspartame products could readily exceed 250 mg. daily (Monte 1984). This is 32 times the limit of consumption recommended by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) here in the US. "Abuse doses" (100 mg aspartame/kg body weight, or more) result in significant elevations of blood methanol concentrations in normal subjects (Segink 1984 - industry's own book). Moreover, the level remains detectable for eight or more hours. Monte (1984) calculated that one-hundredth the fatal level (a standard criterion for safety used by the FDA) translates into only two 12 ounce cans.

We may very well have a difference of opinion on all the topics we have actually discussed But we do not yet have FSAs opinion on our challenges to the safety of your ADI and NOAEL - FSA has ignored these so far.

You must either show that these are correct and that aspartame is indeed safe, or take steps to protect the health of the people by banning methanol from their diets.

Until we have your response to this issue we are still in discussion.

Furthermore, Mr. Duncan, I was reviewing your web site and found this sentence:
"The ADI applies to all sections of the population, including children and infants from the age of 12 weeks. The only exception is for people suffering from a rare genetic disease phenylketonuria (PKU)".

First of all, your own regulations say no child 3 or under are to use artificial sweeteners. I verified that a few years ago. This sentence makes one think an infant can use aspartame. You would want an infant to use a poison, (aspartic acid, an excitotoxin, free methyl alcohol, a neurotoxin, phenylalanine as an isolate at 50%! of the molecule, a neurotoxin - and the molecule breaks down to DKP, a brain tumor agent)??

Mr. Duncan, Dr. John Olney, is one of the most renowned neuroscientists in the world today. He founded the field of neuroscience called excitotoxicity. Neurosurgeon Russell Blaylock, M.D. wrote the book on it, Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills. Dr. Olney in 1972 did a study on aspartic acid which is 40% of aspartame and found that it caused holes in the brains of mice. He knew exactly what aspartame would do to the fetus and children which is why he tried to prevent approval of aspartame. I would like for you to read every single word of his report to the Board of Inquiry, all 49 pages, on how aspartame if approved would destroy the brains of our children and compounded with the use of MSG which has a synergistic and additive would be even more serious. The FDA agreed with Dr. Olney. As you know, they revoked the petition for approval and even tried to have the manufacturer indicted for fraud.

Here is the URL for Dr. John Olney's testimony to the Board of Inquiry of the FDA. I seriously doubt if you would want to rebut one of the most renowned neuroscientists in the world today. Here is the URL - http://www.wnho.net/dr_olney1.doc Notice he says birth defects are a given. If a pregnant woman is told not to drink alcohol, imagine her getting free methyl alcohol! On http://www.mpwhi.com you'll see the records where even the FDA mentioned 3 decades ago that aspartame causes birth defects. Or just google, FDA admits aspartame causes birth defects. They had these records sealed so the public wouldn't see them.

After Donald Rumsfeld called in his markers and assisted by President Reagan got aspartame on the market anyway, the FDA assured Dr. Olney that no child would ever use aspartame. Of course, once it was on the market it was anything goes. It was approved in England, of course, through a business deal, and no studies were done: http://www.wnho.net/how_aspartame_got_approved_in_england.htm

But while you have refused to answer questions, have some mercy on the babies and children and take that off the web site. I'm ashamed of Food Standards. Remember that Food Standards was set up to remove itself from the influence of industry, not give their loyalty to them and sacrifice the people.

I lectured in the UK and I was horrified to pick up a product being sold to toddlers called Bubbleee. The ingredients are aspartame, a deadly chemical poison, acesulfame potassium that caused cancer and leukemia in original studies, saccharin, a coal tar product, brilliant blue dye, a carcinogen, and citric acid. No food, just chemicals. Why does Food Standards allow such a chemical cocktail to be fed to infants? I know, you won't answer that either. Perhaps you should also read the Report For School with information also from Feingold, the ADD people, and Dr. Olney's original study: http://www.mpwhi.com/report_on_aspartame_and_children.htm

In the US in a court of law if someone doesn't want to answer questions because it will incriminate themselves they take "the fifth" and do not answer. This is done by the guilty. Remember that.

If aspartame was really safe, you would be able to prove it and not use propaganda, and would want to answer the questions.

We’ve noted your further comments. We obviously have different views of whether aspartame can be used safely. Given the large amount of existing correspondence I think that further correspondence on the issue is not going to bring us any closer together.

Dear Mr. Duncan,
In other words you can supply unrefutable evidence to FSA and its ignored. So since its ignored and FSA continues to use propaganda disproved and laughed at by experts, you prove to me by what method you decided free methyl alcohol is safe in aspartame. Have you ever read the Merck Manual. Methanol is a severe metabolic poison causing metabolic acidosis.

You haven't answered a single question in my letters. You're saying the same thing over and over again because there is no evidence methanol is safe.

What makes matters worse is that the methanol, classified as a narcotic, causes chronic methanol poisoning. This affects the dopamine system of the brain and causes the addiction. If you have a copy of the 1000 page medical text by H. J. Roberts, M.D. FACP, FCCP, world expert on aspartame, you'll find this information (Aspartame Disease: An Ignored Epidemic, http://www.sunsentpress.com) along with a large chapter on the methanol in aspartame and the mechanism by which is causes such harm.

What if you were in a court of law, Mr. Duncan, and you were asked: "What proof do you have that the methanol in aspartame is safe as reported by COT and FSA?" How would you answer? That is the answer I want too.

I feel that since I have taken the case histories from all over the world for two decades and see what the methanol is doing to humans, such as blinding and killing, I have the right to expect some proof. Where is it? It is well known what methanol does. Do you not remember that wood alcohol or methanol during prohibition blinded and killed. It's still doing it. There have been so many cases of people going blind on aspartame a petition to ban was taken all the way to the Supreme Court with all the evidence anyone would need. The "only" reason it wasn't banned then in 1986 according to reports is there was a corrupt judge.

Read this report which has letters from Dr. Morgan Raiford, an ophthalmologist considered "the specialist in methanol toxicity" who tried to have aspartame banned and examined patients who went blind on the methanol in aspartame. http://www.mpwhi.com/nfb_aspartame_and_vision.htm He is deceased now but owned the Atlanta Eye Hospital. He even examined Joyce Wilson who went blind from the methanol in aspartame and died. Even before I founded Mission Possible Intl two decades ago, Joyce founded "Aspartame Victims And Their Friends" . You see since aspartame was allowed on the market there have been organizations alerting the world. In the short time from Joyce beginning to use aspartame and her death, she had taken 10,000 more cases.

Anybody can say we have decided something is safe. What I'm asking FSA is on what basis. What is your proof, and why are you continuing to give out propaganda that has nothing to do with aspartame? Also have you ever considered the drugs that interact with the methanol. You'll find that information in Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills by neurosurgeon Russell Blaylock, M.D. http://www.russellblaylockmd.com In Dr. Roberts medical text you'll find a whole chapter on drugs that interact with aspartame. Did you ever take that into consideration? No, of course, not, and I would like you to do so.

This email is in response to both the email below (dated 5th April) and to the email you sent to Donna on 28th March.

The Food Standards Agency is advised by the independent Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment (COT). The article on the Food Standards Agency (FSA) website reported that COT concluded that 'long-term exposure to methanol consumed through food, including from aspartame, is unlikely to be harmful to health'. This opinion took account of the current total levels of methanol exposure.

Following this opinion from COT the FSA confirmed it believed that aspartame is not of concern at current levels of use. However, as with all additives, its safety is kept under constant review, and, as you know, we have commissioned a study on aspartame that focuses on people who have reported bad reactions to this sweetener.

As you may be aware, the European Food Safety Authority is preparing a scientific opinion on the interpretation of the results of the Ramazzini study and the suggested implication of methanol reported in that study and the study by Halldorsson, and they hope to publish this by the end of the year.

I won't repeat all the information since you have here my letter to FSA, but FSA did no study. You can't base methanol's safety on review because if you reviewed the issue you would find there has already been a study done with labeled aspartame and the formaldehyde converted from the free methyl alcohol was found in the tissues. In other words, aspartame embalms living tissue, and this is even discussed in the 1000 page medical text, Aspartame Disease: An Ignored Epidemic by H. J. Roberts, M.D. FSA couldn't base it on science because true science shows free methyl alcohol unaccompanied by ethanol as is nature or unbound to protein as in nature is a severe metabolic poison and as the Merck Manual says, a teaspoonful can kill you. Even a chemical student in high school would know that.

Then you have the matter that methanol and formaldehyde cause cancer. That's why in Proposition 65 in California the law is if a product has methanol or formaldehyde it must contain a cancer warning. Aspartame is listed with Proposition 65 but they told me its not yet been enforced. Notably methanol and formaldehyde cause lymphoma and leukemia. What did Dr. Soffritti of the Ramazzini Institute in Italy find but that aspartame is a multipotential carcinogen and causes lymphoma and leukemia, but many others as well. Of course, FSA and EFSA do not want to accept the Ramazzini Studies peer reviewed by 7 world experts, they would rather get excuses from industry which can get you in big trouble when you don't know what you're talking about. An excuse used by EFSA on one study was that the rats had respiratory disease. As Dr. Soffritti pointed out this was the lifetime study of the rat, and respiratory disease is the dying process. They were dying so, of course, they had respiratory disease. This points out that the study was so prestigious they couldn't find an excuse so came up with something so stupid it had researchers laughing around the world. Then Dr. Koeter of EFSA resigned and put out a press release saying they were pressured by industry to hijack science.

FSA was created to stay away from industry and instead it appears they are right smack in their arms again.

There are good reasons why aspartame causes so much cancer, one of them is the methanol and formaldehyde. Another is the diketopiperazine, often called a brain tumor agent. Jerome Bressler, author of the infamous Bressler Report (FDA) recently died: http://www.mpwhi.com/courageous_fda_whistleblower_j_bressler_died.htm As you will read I spoke with him for years. He was there at the FDA during the aspartame wars, compliance director, and investigating. He said sometimes Searle with all their skullduggery refused to allow him in until he yelled at them he would get a court order. Searle got caught many times with their pants down trying to get aspartame to show safety, and involved in fraud. You can't get a poison to show safety, and aspartame is a chemical poison. Jerome Bressler told Lane Shore, Mission Possible Chicago, that many times what they were looking for was the diketopiperazine. When you isolate the two amino acids and back them up it will form diketopiperazine. Even though its referred to as a brain tumor agent (caused so many brain tumors in original studies), and who knows how bad the cover up was, it simply forms tumors wherever it ends up, as in the brain or the liver. Dr. Soffritti's last study showed liver cancer and lung cancer.

Of interest is that it was Paul Turner who approved aspartame in England without asking anyone or doing any testing through a business deal. Parliament had a big blow out about it. That's why Food Standards was set up to rid itself of industry influence. Instead FSA has linked itself again with industry. The lesson was never learned. However, in the case of Paul Turner I was told by someone with FSA when I lectured in England in 2000 that Turner died of liver cancer. He obviously was told it was safe and got hooked on it. You reap what you sow!

When I first started researching aspartame two decades ago my husband on seeing so many tumors and cancer caused by aspartame said: "I don't know why they named it aspartame, they should have called it "Tumoroften"! Yes, Dr. Soffritti hit it right on the head - aspartame is a multipotential carcinogen, its a tumor often product, a very deadly chemical poison.

G. D. Searle before they sold aspartame to Monsanto hired a lady in Maryland to shred all the studies, but to send one copy to France. Her father was a physician and she said she was use to reading studies. She gave me an affidavit that says: "Aspartame killed everything it touched". It's killing people all over the world. Little by little I've been able to get the many original studies and FDA remarks on the studies so bad they sealed them from the public. Here's one with FDA's notes that admits it causes birth defects: http://www.mpwhi.com/fda_admits_aspartme_causes_birth_defects.htm Read it and notice the statement comes from an FDA Investigator. Today the European Environmental Assn, Dallas Clinic and Dr. Wm Deagle's environmental association have concluded that because of aspartame, MSG and fluoride no child will be born without some version of autism by the year 2013. Think of it, known all the way back from the 1970's that aspartame causes birth defects and the FDA hid the findings and never added a warning.

The point I'm making is that FDA did not approve aspartame, they revoked the petition for approval. Here it
is: http://www.mpwhi.com/fda_petition1.doc Here is the renowned Dr. John Olney's testimony to the Board of Inquiry of the FDA telling them what would happen to the brains of children if aspartame was approved. http://www.wnho.net/dr_olney1.doc As Jerome Bressler told me face to face, "it took the President of the US to get aspartame on the market, we would have never allowed it, it was a favor to Rumsfeld".

So who is suffering because of Rumsfeld's chicanery? The people of the world, and the world already knows England's part in getting this poison into your country without studies. FSA has the ability to cut the ties with industry, tell them to stay out of their office, and save the people there by banning aspartame. How many more studies do you think are needed with 30 years of independent, scientific peer reviewed studies showing it to be unsafe. Searle showed in trying to get aspartame to show safety that it was impossible, and so no study from industry can be used, and they are the only ones who say its a safe in an effort to defend their poison.

If England wants to do a study repeat Dr. Alemany's study with labeled aspartame and see the formaldehyde for yourself in the issues. One of Dr. Soffritti's studies showed that if a mother uses aspartame during pregnancy and the baby survives it can grow up to cancer. Think of how many of these innocent little babies are born with brain tumors, autism and other horrors because of the greed of a pharmaceutical firm and Rumsfeld.

Saying methanol in aspartame is safe when its free and unbound and pure will simply have more researchers laughing out you through the world. It reminds me of a researcher I met in England the first time I was there. He said, "Betty, when Monsanto talks about this little bit of methanol we all laugh. In molecular chemistry is one molecule of aspartic acid to one molecule of methanol to one molecule of phenylalanine." In this case you're talking about 33% pure methyl alcohol. It's 10% by weight. The Trocho Study also showed aspartame damages DNA which we have always known and when you damage DNA you can destroy humanity. No matter where you go in the world, and I've been to many countries, you can see the damage.

Imagine the billions or trillions saved in health care alone! But this is a plea to save the people there by telling the truth. Reading FSA's position is like reading a story by Walt Disney. It's such a fairy tale you'll never get anyone to believe it, and will be exposed constantly. Reconsider the issue.